New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-05-14
WlI1Iyc FOR TIE MARX VERDICT

| TIE JURY LOCKED UP FOR THE NiGHT-LIrrLE
ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE YESTERDAY.
Tho witnesses tor the defence yesterday in the case
OF Morris Marx attempted to throw out suspicons that
Samuels Jakowsky. the husband OF the murdered
woman was the thrower OF the vitrol, but no direct
evidence was submitted to that effect, as Marx was
not put on the witness-stand.
Janousky was recalled to the stand and examined
further "a to the marks of vitrol on his hand and
slothing He produced his overcoat on the lining of
which we're large spaces where the huld had burned
Rachel Vaensky, of No. 3 Frankln-st, was an
important witness Tor the defence she TESTIFIED that
Jakowsky and his wife had quarreed at ieast on one
casion Ia her presence SIZE told the Recorder in
low tone of voice about several conversations which
abe had had with the murdered woman. The Re
corder after hearing the testimony decided that it
was pertinent and the statements were read by the
stenographer 90 the jury The witness said went
Ia see her on Saturday when she III the hospital
said, How do you tsel She said, very bad /
asked How did this happen 2 She said Il was
fast asleep | could not tell. could not SEQ who
nd it, asked her why do you say Marx dd II I
She said i do not know. only say 50 because every
body tells me that il is so"
J he witness acknowledged some ill-ieeling toward
the husband of the murdered woman. The DEF ace
closed without putting Marx on the witneJs-stand.
Mr.. Atcnson made the closing argument ior the de-
fence and Dstrct-AttOrney MARITIME spoke tor the
prosecution. Mr.. MARITIME urged conviction OF murder
In the first degree He said that there were peculiarly
brutal features which made the crime one which
should be punished TO the full extent OF the law
The Recorder submitted to the jury the question OF
the defendants guilt of murder IN the first degree.
in the first degree and manslaughter IN
tho second degree he held that toe law making the
killing OF a person in the commission OF felony
murder In the fist degree applied to an assault upon
the same person, that II Marx, even II no did not
intend 70 Kill. did intend TO commt serious assault,
and as result OF that assault the woman dieu no was
guilty of murder in the hrst degree He said there
was no evidence Of a premeditated design 10 effect
death but he submitted the question OF murder IN the
first degree under the provision respecting death
resulting in the oOmmissIoI OF "A felony. Ibe ne
cOrder charge lasted Tor an hour ana haiI ana the
case vas given TO tho jury about o'clock
At $50 o'clock the inry sent In eealed commulca-
ton b the Court asking Instructions Inc heeouer
sent back word that the Jury must come o cour Tor
any answer When they rad taken their seats and
announced that verdict had been reached, ice,
oorder Smyth read their communication, when asked
whether he did not charge that they were rot
vrarra nted In giving verdict OF murder in the nrs
nepree and sail that there some doubt among
them on this point. The Recorder stated eAphctly
thatle made no such charge. Then he repeated the
main points in his charge, explaining the differences
betge.n murder IN the first and second degrees aud
the degrees OF manslaughter. They again retired at
$40 o'clock.
Marx sat through the scene with an expression oil
anxiety on his oountenance ana with color that was
cornse-Ike lie appeared relieved when the Jury
vent ont and faint smile showed itself on his face
Tor an instant response To some encouragement
from his counsel ,
At ll:15 o'clock agreement had been reached,
and the Jury was the Astor House Tor supper
and then locked up tor the night Marx was taken
back TO the Iombs